Topic: ETH = Game Over - page 28. (Read 40467 times)

Complexity and "Turing completeness" are not the real culprit here - those are all good things that we can have someday. The real culprit is poor language design. Specifically, I would recommend using "functional" (rather than "procedural") languages for mission-critical code which will be driving "smart contracts" - and even better if a high-level "specification" language could be used, allowing formal derivation of a (verifiably correct) program in a low-level "implementation" language (ie, providing mathematical proof that the implementation satisfies the specification - and mitigating the problem where the high-level human-readable "description" is different from the low-level machine-runnable "code"). I suspect many people (raised in a world where JavaScript is the "assembly language of the web") might not know about some of the history and possibly related work. So take this as a stern lecture telling you to take a good look at the history of functional languages (and specification vs implementation languages) as used in mission-critical projects, including finance - which, even when using such tools, are still very hard to get right - as we can see from the decades-long history of failures of major projects in defense, healthcare, aerospace, etc.

Interesting https://medium.com/@gitguild/not-too-late-for-humans-to-save-ethereum-2f42f5fdfb75#.72e3lnkzs

Prices are falling again on btc-e (slowly for now), and look to be set up for another huge step down!!
Do you think I am simply trolling to try to buy cheaper ETH? 

Volatile/Bad Fuel that sometimes explodes, for one of the worlds most wasteful, insecure and pointless Rube Goldberg machines .

Sure , Fuel.

If you are willing to share this, how much DASH do you have staked/deposited in order to get that ROI?

Makes me a few hundred $$/mo. so I'm happy.  It's a terrific investment for long term strategies.

But I don't know if anyone has been able to prove conclusively that DASH is not really decentralized, although the suspicion is apparently strong amongst some especially Monero supporters.

Yes, DASH.org.  The first DAO.  

The difference: Marketing that feature is taking a backseat to development.  Doing it right I'd say.

Do you know any decentralized autonomous organization ?

I don't ..

I never thought the Etheruem could compete with bitcoin. They are aiming for the different market sector, one is currency, the other is fuel.

Ethereum with a weakest base started to compete bitcoin, but failed, I suggested some of my friends in the beginning, when they were trying to buy some ethereum, that do not waste your time and money at there, we should have to concentrate on bitcoin alone, in that case we can earn only with bitcoin also. 


and today they are much happy with me.

You're the tard spreading lies and FUD. Classy nice guy ain't yah. Nope.

DAO has been hacked/exploited, and Ethereum is rapidly losing trust in their developers, as they want to introduce an ETH hardfork to reverse the hack. What a wonderful decentralized currency where a few people decide what happens and the entire network is subjugated to the decisions of a few. Not to mention Ethereum already has big blockchain, soon ethereum will turn into a centralized bank , if it doesnt die before that.

Here are a few important things:

1) 20 second block timer with average blocksize = 89 Kb, that means that the blockchain grows 375 Mb /day.

The ETH blockchain in 2 years will be bigger by 264 Gb +-

The ETH nodes will start dissapearing pretty quickly with that size, because the reindexing and all other operations you need to perform when you download and update a node, will take far too long for anyone to bother.

Soon only a few datacenters will be able to operate ETH.

2) The development is wreckless, they spend more time on going to PR events than to actually engineer the code well, first wallet softwares were buggy as hell, took years to sync, which is fair because bitcoin was buggy also at first. However instead of promoting a buggy as hell client, they should have focused on development first and then marketing.

3) Ethereum is too complex, and the more complex something is, the more attack surfaces it has. An ideal cryptocurrency has to be simple and secure. And ETH has many more 0 day bugs that we dont know of yet, so this wont be the last hack. It came out far too fast because of PR pressure. The devs should have stayed 1 more year reviewing and researching the code and make the coin secure in that time, before pushing it out to the public.

4) It's already centralized as hell, the devs can just reverse transactions like this. Sure reversing a hack is obviously good right ?, but the road to Hell is also paved with good intentions. Abusing power comes in small increments. First they only reverse hacks, and then later you find out that everyone will become censored.

5) ETH devs want to impose capital controls on ETH holders. The ETH devs don't respect the free market.

The lost cost were already supposedly locked in a child DAO, so then why are they not allowing people to trade? Because they know that people would sell their ETH fast.

---

There are 3 options for ETH and in the next 27 days the devs and the ETH community will have to decide on one of them, and in my opinion the results will be the following:

1)  They decide to not hardfork in which case the thief gets away with the loot but atleast the integrity of ETH is preserved. The result will probably be a massive selloff of ETH and loss of future confidence in the ETH devs as they failed to provide secure code, it will seriously impact the future growth of ETH which they may or may not recover from.

2) They decide to hardfork, in which case all confidence will be lost in ETH, and it will probably deal a fatal blow to this currency's future, and it will shows as an example how a decentralized currency may not be so decentralized, and a warning to all future altcoin devs to change their attitude. It will impact BTC as well, and many media shills will try to put dirt on BTC's reputation as well.

3) They wait the full 27 days and in the last minute they decide 1) or 2). In this case, the panic and uncertainty will just magnify the negative effects caused by their decision, and whichever they decide upon, the effects will just be much worse.


So by logic they should decide 1) and announce it fast, since the longer they wait the more uncertainty they cause by the inaction.

That's just my honest opinion.

---

I really think people should just switch over to NXT, because it's far more decentralized and it has better developers. When last time a hack happened in NXT, the developers didnt reversed the transaction. Because in the NXT community the decentralization, transparency and fungibility is the number one priority, that supercedes everything else. The police can catch the hacker with any other method and recover the funds, but the decentralization is sacred.